The history of the Oklahoma really needs to be told

Pearl Harbor was too shallow for contemporary torpedoes. So, torpedo nets were unnecessary. But the Japanese developed a torpedo that could run in shallow water.

@glenndevilliers1337

2 жыл бұрын

But the US navy should have known. The British attacked the Italian navy at Taranto using modified torpedo's.

I bet half the people watching this are Oklahomans.

@goochfitness26

Жыл бұрын

I know your comment was 3 years ago but I’m watching this because I’m playing World of Warships so I’m learning about the ships I like to use

@TheNightWatcher1385

5 ай бұрын

Proudly.

TORA TORA TORA

This PBS documentary is interesting. We want this programme in Latin America!!!

@jimd2463

7 жыл бұрын

Vinko Milic how about Nipponise ?

Please give me the name of the show that this came from.

0:34 wrong ship cuz that is the california

Painful to see my girl being hit

Uss Oklahoma got rekt by a lot of torpedos

poor men😫😫😫😫

Intentionally all lined up like sitting ducks???

Это походу Вам за будущее что вы натворили

Was this made for 3rd graders? "The Japanese picked Pearl Harbor for their attack because the entire fleet was concentrated in one small area". They're not going to attack where the fleet isn't located. Also, any ship in port is a sitting duck. The poor Oklahoma was hit by multiple torpedos and started to list, then she was hit again by multiple torpedos higher on the side of the ship due to the list. I'm not sure if having every single watertight door closed would have made any difference. Plus, this makes it sound like they attacked specifically to sink ships named after states. The Japanese wanted the carriers, they knew carriers were the way of the future, they were just unlucky in that the U.S. carriers were not in the harbor. Fun fact, not a single U.S. Battleship was sunk by enemy action after Pearl Harbor.

@ronjones9447

Жыл бұрын

The USS North Carolina took a torpedo that did some damage in 1942 going to North Carolina this week. She is number 1 I wanna see on my list

At last it was better to sacrifice some battleships then sacrifice some aircraft carriers.

The Utah was not a Battleship anymore at the time of Pearl Harbor it was a target ship, and did not even have it old guns installed. Also not all the Pacific fleet Battleships were at Pearl. The Battleship Colorado was undergoing a refit on the west coast at the time.

Better they were attacked in port , out at sea they did not have a chance

@skozlo

3 жыл бұрын

Ron, My dad was on the Oklahoma during the attack and was reassigned to the San Francisco. I am also a veteran who served on the aircraft carrier USS Independence CVA-62. I cannot understand your logic ... saying 'better they were attacked in port'. At sea, they are fully loaded, maneuverable, protected by air planes from carriers, ships in company, constantly on watch and prepared for battle with the enemies, above and below them. The San Francisco was probably the most embattled battleship of WWII. Read the official damage report and view the pictures at: cdm16099.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/collection/p16099coll14/id/4996 I have the negatives of those pictures my dad took for the report. They went to sea, fought, and won. In Dec. 2021 I hope to attend the 80th anniversary of the attack . If I come to the same conclusion as yours, I'll post it.

@rebelyank6361

3 жыл бұрын

I understand and agree with his statement. Of all the ships hit at Pearl Harbor only the Arizona, Oklahoma & target ship Utah were deemed uneconomical to salvage and repair. All others returned to service before wars end, some within a month or 2. If any of the ships had been hit and sunk outside the harbor they would have sunk to an irretrievable depth and been lost. Other than the unlucky shot that blew up the Arizona and the tragically high losses on the Oklahoma the attack was pretty much a big failure. Of all the Japanese ships involved in the attack all but 1 destroyer were later sunk in battle and that 1 destroyer was surrendered.

@toddf9321

3 жыл бұрын

As a Naval professional, I don't agree with your statement. Here is why. In port, the ship in usually undergoing maintenance and inspection, which means the ship's material condition is relaxed and compartmentalization is compromised. This would allow unchecked flooding and fire progression. Further, some of the crew would be ashore at any given point. The maximum percentage of crew would be ashore on the weekend, leaving mostly the duty section (typical about 1/3 of the total crew complement). Should an attack happen at the point, the ship would have limited damage control and offensive/defensive capabilities. The ship is at the mercy of the attacking force. Contrast that with at sea. At sea the ship is fully manned, the material condition is Yoke or modified Zebra or even Zebra (which mean the ship is compartmentalized at all times), sensors operating, lookouts posted, weapon control stations partially manned at all times. If a threat is detected, the total ship's company goes to battle stations and the ship is ready to full fight within minutes. Additionally, the ship's control station are manned and ready to maneuver and be at speed. At sea is where the ship can fight! I will concede that a ship sunk in port is recoverable. However, the objective is not be be sunk, but to put ordnance on the threat.

@toddf9321

3 жыл бұрын

@@skozlo Thanks for posting this link. The amount of damage the USS San Francisco CA-38 endured is astonishing. Have you seen the battle damage of the USS Franklin CV-13 or USS Laffey DD-724? Those ships survived precisely for being at sea and fully manned and battle ready. Horrible loss of life, yet survived because the crew didn't give up on the ship. Remarkable.

@nogoodnameleft

Жыл бұрын

The USS San Francisco lost her Admiral, Callaghan, Captain, Young, and every high ranking officer except McCandless and the engineering chief officer. I consider the ships that technically survived to be meaningless if high ranking officers were lost or the death toll was catastrophic. USS Franklin (807 KIA) and USS Bunker Hill (393 KIA) were involved in the 1st and 3rd largest loss of life in a single incident for all damaged or sunk U.S. aircraft carriers yet they "survived", meaning they never went back to active duty and what a waste of salvaging/towing resources that could have been used on ships that could be repaired quickly. USS Cassin and USS Downes were completely destroyed at Pearl Harbor. For "USN honor" purposes some equipment was salvaged but the hull and superstructure for both destroyers were torn up and scrapped, not salvaged. Both ships were actually decommissioned officially so that means the new ships named and numbered the same were not the same ships at all despite USN propaganda.

And then they got nuked after pulling some weird shiet 🤣